Judging a Skater through the CoP with Tech Asst

1. A skater is announced to take the ice. The skater presents him/her self to the public and judges before settling in to begin.Is this step a rule?

2. The music begins. A few seconds later the skater begins to move his/her arms.The timing begins when the skater moves - not when the music begins. Correct?

3. In a circular movement over the ice the skater eventually executes a triple axel. The Tech Asst. calls the jump underrotated. a) are the judges compelled to give GoEs for a double axel?b) should there be a judgement on a transitions or lack thereof leading up to the 3A?

4. With crossovers and a nice wide rocker the skater then executes a 3Lx3T combo. The 3L lands well but the 3T is underrotated and faulty and so said the Tech Asst. a) Full credit for the 3L but what for the faulty and incomplete 3T?b) Are the crossovers and the Rocker sufficient to satisfy the transition requirement?

5.With the same scenario but a fall has ocurred on the 3T. how does a tech asst. handle this?

6. After the 3T, the skater works in a bit of footwork leading up to a Flying Camel, however, the air turn is just one half or a waltz jump into the camel. Should the Tech Asst say anything? Is there not a rule about a flying camel needing at least an axel rotation?

7. As the program goes on, there is the failed 3Lx 3T combo, a new successful 3Tx3T and a signle 3T. Any Zayak problems here?

One can see here with just a few elements just how much work has to be covered in the CoP. Is there a computer software program that can gather up the information from the Tech Asst to ensure that all the rules are covered?

Great thread, Joe. I will have to leave the technical skating questions to our experts. But about computers, yes, I believe that the program that keeps track of all this is quite detailed and complete. The Technical Specialist and the judges just have to hit the button and the computer takes it from there.

3. In a circular movement over the ice the skater eventually executes a triple axel. The Tech Asst. calls the jump underrotated. a) are the judges compelled to give GoEs for a double axel?b) should there be a judgement on a transitions or lack thereof leading up to the 3A?

I think you mean the technical specialist. At a major event, there will also be an assistant technical specialist (at a smaller event the controller may also play that role) as a backup to the technical specialist, who is the main official responsible for these decisions.

Yes, the judges are supposed to judge a downgraded jump as such. At a small event without computers or headsets, or if the decision is made after the fact during a review, they might not know at the time whether the jump was downgraded though.

If the jump is badly telegraphed (I think that's what you're describing), then the approach phase of the jump is not adequate and should be reflected in the GOE.

4. With crossovers and a nice wide rocker the skater then executes a 3Lx3T combo. The 3L lands well but the 3T is underrotated and faulty and so said the Tech Asst. a) Full credit for the 3L but what for the faulty and incomplete 3T?b) Are the crossovers and the Rocker sufficient to satisfy the transition requirement?

There's no transition requirement, except for the required solo jump preceded by steps in the short program. Since you're talking about a jump combination, that's obviously not the case here. The transitions you describe are fairly simple, although the single rocker is fairly difficult, so they wouldn't contribute much to the approach phase consideration of the GOE for that move or to the transitions component.

Depending how underrotated the second jump was, and how good the first jump was, the GOE for the whole combination would be somewhere between 0 and -3 (-1 to -3 reduction for the underrotation, -2 to -3 if it was in fact downgraded).

5.With the same scenario but a fall has ocurred on the 3T. how does a tech asst. handle this?

The technical specialist (caller) would call the jump as a 3T or as a 2T if it was underrotated enough to be downgraded and would also say "fall," which would trigger the 1.00 fall deduction.

6. After the 3T, the skater works in a bit of footwork leading up to a Flying Camel, however, the air turn is just one half or a waltz jump into the camel. Should the Tech Asst say anything? Is there not a rule about a flying camel needing at least an axel rotation?

There's no such rule -- half a rotation in the air is plenty for a flying camel. The judges would consider the quality of the air position in assessing the GOE.

7. As the program goes on, there is the failed 3Lx 3T combo, a new successful 3Tx3T and a signle 3T. Any Zayak problems here?

Absolutely. Only two 3T attempts allowed. The skater would get get credit for the first 3T (not much if it was downgraded and/or had a fall), but no credit at all for the second combination because the whole element would be made illegal by the third 3T, and similarly no credit for the solo fourth 3T.

6. After the 3T, the skater works in a bit of footwork leading up to a Flying Camel, however, the air turn is just one half or a waltz jump into the camel. Should the Tech Asst say anything? Is there not a rule about a flying camel needing at least an axel rotation?
Joe

I think i may have caused this confusion - i don't think a flying camel has to do an axel rotation - between half rev and full rev is plenty. Its the forward flying sitspin that has a an axel rotation, technically a one foot axel rotation since it lands on the same foot, but since it svery rare to see this executed "properly" i.e. with the full air turns, i suspect that there is not mention of it in the GOE.